Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 August 26

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was redirect to Template:AT&T. Reasonable arguments, no opposition. Primefac (talk) 02:08, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|WarnerMedia|module=}}

Following AT&T's acquisition of Time Warner, now WarnerMedia and after substantial reorganisation of the AT&T template. This template is no longer needed. WarnerMedia is now [http://about.att.com/pages/company_profile one of four units that make up AT&T] and WarnerMedia has been added as a group/section within the AT&T template with its dedicated Home Box Office Inc., Otter Media (recently created by another editor), Turner Broadcasting System and Warner Bros. templates - each added as a child template and just like what you see in the current WarnerMedia template. The WarnerMedia template can always be created again in future if needed, but at present, I believe this is now redundant. Steven (Editor) (talk) 16:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

• Delete Makes sense. – ^(t@lk) 00:57, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
• Redirect to Template:AT&T. Out of 118 articles that have Template:WarnerMedia, only 3 also have Template:AT&T. I think including Template:AT&T is a better default choice than having neither navbox, and then let editors of each article decide whether to remove Template:AT&T. --Bsherr (talk) 17:04, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was merge to Template:Fusion power. Reasonable arguments, no opposition. Primefac (talk) 02:07, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Fusion power|module=|type=merge}}
• {{Tfd links|Fusion methods|module=|type=merge}}
• {{Tfd links|Fusion experiments|module=|type=merge}}

Propose merging Template:Fusion power, Template:Fusion methods and Template:Fusion experiments.

Template was split in 2008 to avoid being over-cluttered, but now that navbox is capable of making presentable templates by using subgroups and because these three templates were initially intended to be together with complementary content, I propose merging them back together. The templates are also displayed as three different navboxes which makes articles with multiple navboxes look cluttered. Another reason for the merge is that some of the newer articles tend to only contain one-of the three navboxes (unaware of the other two navboxes), and I think it would benefit the articles to have the content of all three navboxes because they fit into the larger theme of fusion. -- AquaDTRS (talk) 20:38, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

• Merge. Agreed. To be clear, Template:Fusion power currently transcludes the other two navboxes. I can't imagine when the other two navboxes would be transcluded separately where a merged navbox wouldn't be appropriate instead. --Bsherr (talk) 17:12, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).